Ultimately, I cannot say I know a lot but I know enough to say this, very few of our presidents have ever made a big turning point, I mean sure we have won wars or lived over eras, I've read the posts people made about McCain leading the same as Bush, honestly to think outside of the box, all the presidents are doing the same thing well at least most. To elaborate, its like each president builds a rail-road track and we don't know when we'll get the train to our destination. We don't really care about whats in the way, as long as we "live". Realize how no matter where we retreat we get back to the same thing, there's war again. Its true we have to have rich people, middle class, then the poor people that's what stacks it up, If there's nothing on the bottom, their won't be anything on the top. Anyways i find it some-what accurate when people say "choose the lesser evil out of the 2". Obama wants things to stay around longer so he decides to raise the taxes but that can lead to a lot of disastrous things, Having money in the first place was a disastrous thing it was to "CONTROL" the country anyway, you can keep things in order but in a sense it still messes things up because everything is about money now. Its like if you were never addicted to drugs it wouldn't be one of your dependencies, but now it is. But ontop of this to finish my point I would actually vote for Obama for some reasons despite that I've been talking about all this. We do in-fact need a change of directions, earlier i heard someone say "it sounds as if it was a gamble". It is a gamble, but in a sense it isn't because McCain is doing the same things so if you want change no matter what Obama is the change for these 2 "evils" it's not like there's any other choices. Our country is slowly dying whether you like it or not unless some miracle changes our route, that's why any reasonable gamble is better than just a sitting duck and by that I mean is voting for someone who does the same things as the last president would. I can't say what president is doing what but in general is what I mean.

So, we've got ourselves a john McCain and his 44 year old woman alaskan governor as his running mate: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080829/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_veepstakes Frankly I must say I am quite surprised by his choice

ITS CAUSE SHE'S ALASKAN, ISN'T IT?!
I'm not surprised at all, she's benefited our state so much at the moment, people have constantly been asking her to run for president. The most beneficial thing I can think of is the fact that she increased the taxation on oil companies, making our Alaskan dividend this year well over what it used to be, (We don't know for sure what the increase is until september 1st, over 2000 I can say easily) as well as releasing an energy policy that says anyone who needs it (so everyone) can choose to get 1000 extra dollars for the increased gas prices. I like free money.
But she's hard on big corporations and only cares about the populace. Modern day robin hood who can make babies.
I find her to be the ideal choice for a running mate.
Not sure what this means for our local government though. They should just move the capital here if they win.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Aug 29 2008, 11:51 pm by Rantent.

McCain's choice of Sarah Palin totally refutes his argument that Obama is too young and too inexperienced to be President; Palin is 3 years younger than Obama and has been a governor for less time than he has been a Senator.

On national policy, McCain's "strong point," foreign leaders, the American public, and even the White House are beginning to coalesce around Obama's viewpoints and proposed policies. Perhaps the nation and even our buffoon of our President realise that Obama is right and that McCain stands alone?

We're going to have the first woman president now. For reasons beyond me McCain will get elected (a very sad day) and then the old geezer will kick the bucket soon after that. Then we'll have the first woman president who is very young with very little experience. Then she'll be going through menopause as president. The timing is perfect.

I think its weird how she's younger than my mom by a few years. Wow.

Yea, but it's a shame the public won't realize that. Everyone's probably having an orgasm because of the nomination thinking it's a brilliant move. I'm interested in hearing what Fox News has to say about it. No, I'm even more interested in hearing what Colbert has to say about it.

I'm surprised she's for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and also that McCain is against it.

Heh, and you know how people are always saying McCain or Obama is out of touch with the public, but how much more out of touch can you be when you're the governor of ALASKA.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Aug 30 2008, 12:06 am by Donkey Punch.

Most of Alaska wants to drill, but it's a national wildlife refuge, so it's a national decision. (People from California also keep coming up to protest it.)

Or the other option.. First black president, lasts a day and a half before some prejudice fool assassinates him. BIDEN SAVES US ALL. (He's who I was rooting for originally.)

Two anagrams of "Sarah Palin" I found amusing. Anal parish and A plain rash.

I bet people will point out that she runs the largest state in the US. I'm sure many people will fall for that.

Also that's sad people from California care more about your environment than you do.

I prefer Obama, although I'm not American.

Well if any other state had as much forest as us, or at least as great a percentage of it in their state, they would probably win an award or something.

Palin's a good choice for McCain to win the presidential elections (omg hawt girlz && OOH, WOMAN!), but she'll be a terribad vice president. TOO INEXPERIENCED!

Go Obama.

You cry about her being inexperienced but you won't extend the same courtesy to Obama?
Both are seriously under experienced.

At least she's better than that wench Hilary.

Republicans cried first about Obama's inexperience and yet now they have an even more inexperienced VP candidate who is a heartbeat away from the presidency.

Also, Obama has way more experience than Palin. Last night I found a random forum I've never heard about through Google with a topic about Palin and I saw this post.
http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62430

That's always a reliable way to get accurate information.

I didn't say Palin's inexperience was dismissible, I said they are both inadequately experienced.

The poster didn't really provide any of his own information. It's the wiki info that is the point.

Here let me do my own comparison of their experience with info from wikipedia.

Obama's experience


Palin's experience

Really wikis aren't reliable either.

They can be unreliable, but do you have any factual issues with the information I posted?

Not if you're a Democrat and especially pro-choice.

Yeah... McCain made the DUMBEST decision picking that lady for vp. I mean, the governor of ALASKA?! She's only been governor for two years, and she's under investigation for something! If McCain drops dead (seeing as how he's ancient), she would be THE WORST president.

Just saying

McCain isn't going to win; we won't have to deal with President Palin or President McCain.

OMG, my internet is so lame, it just erased my entire speech on this thing.
rewriting my post...
This investigation is simply a retaliation of the "good ol' boys" network she ousted when she initially became governor.
The story begins when senator Ted Stevens became Majority Leader a long time ago. (Since like before I was born.) He, being in a seat of power, and maintaining it for like 20 years, offered a lot of opportunities to many people in Alaska looking into politics. Many of these politicians were corrupt, and in essence our entire political situation has been a bunch of people in agreement. Now this can be a good thing, but often ends up working against the majority of the populace. If your looking for examples, our current senators are Ted Stevens and Lisa Murkowski who just happens to be the niece of Frank Murkowski. Hmm.
So anyway, upon getting into office, she had many of these old politicians investigated, and turns out many of them were accepting bribes from oil companies, as well as mining and forestry, ect. They were getting a lot of money so things stayed the same. Basically she renewed the entire Alaskan political system, and even Ted Stevens is being charged with accepting bribes.
So anyway, with a great number of new politicians up there with her, it was no problem to pass some bills that had been blocked by the older political officials accepting bribes. So with that, she managed to tax oil companies an even higher amount to drill, and instead of them paying a bunch of politicians, they pay the populace of Alaska.

I'm just saying, Sarah Palin has created more benefits (In the form of, I get $1300 more this year for living in Alaska than I have in the years past.) for me in the past two years than the rest of the Alaskan political system has in the last 20 or so years.

Although, I hope McCain loses, because I want Palin to remain in Alaska.

I don't get that shit about Palin drawing Clinton supporters. Why would pro-choice supporters go for someone who is pro-life and pro-offshore drilling.